Krystallnacht - source related study

GCSE History

David Rose 11C

Krystallnacht

Source A was written by a Nazi journalist Fritz Hesse, written several years after after the night of Krystallnacht (18 to be precise). It is an account of a dinner sat by a collection of German Party leaders and generals, just a few hours before the events of Krystallnacht. Looking at the date of writing and the source of the information, the credibility is debatable. The passage is a summary of an account written 18 years after the event and it was written by a Nazi. Usually this could be dismissed immediately because the Nazi’s were well known for falsifying reports for propaganda reasons, but due to the information given, it seams as if Fritz was not a Nazi sympathiser, and only decided to release this information because the nazi regime had been crushed. The Nazi regime was very harsh on anyone who opposed them, which would explain the time gap between the event and the evidence being given. Under the assumption that Fritz was not a Nazi sympathiser, this would be a very valuable piece of information as it was written by someone who was actually at the dinner. Source B source B was written in a secret report by the Nazi Supreme Court and it was written after Krystallnacht. I believe that the report is not necessarily incorrect, but it was altered slightly. The fact that it was a secret report would suggest that the information would be true, but I suspect it may have been altered to favour Hitler and Gobbels in case the report was discovered. The source is valuable to historians, but should be understood with caution.

I believe that source C gives a very accurate report of the events, although it may have been exaggerated due to anti German feelings at the time. An American consul, who witnessed the events personally, wrote the report. He suggests that the SS men were given weapons and were told to start the attacks, which completely refutes the idea that the attacks were spontaneous. It also suggest that all of the German emergency services were told to join in this attack on the Jews, with fire engines only putting out fires that started on German property. This information came from ‘a reliable source’. This either means that the information was collected from various bits or gossip and hearsay, designed to generate anti-Nazi feeling amongst the public of the world, or that the source was an insider and did not want to be named due to Nazi hostility against its opponents. The second is most likely as propaganda was frowned upon in democratic countries.

Sources D and E both tell the same sort of information as source C. Source D describes events before Krystallnacht, all of German hostility towards the Jews. It tells of signs being put in cinemas and shops saying phrases such as ‘Jews not wanted’. On first examination this seams to back up the idea that the attacks on Krystallnacht were spontaneous and by the public. Using knowledge of the Nazi regime, it is possible that the shops and cinemas were ordered to have such signs on display by the Nazi’s as a large percentage of the German population ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Sources D and E both tell the same sort of information as source C. Source D describes events before Krystallnacht, all of German hostility towards the Jews. It tells of signs being put in cinemas and shops saying phrases such as ‘Jews not wanted’. On first examination this seams to back up the idea that the attacks on Krystallnacht were spontaneous and by the public. Using knowledge of the Nazi regime, it is possible that the shops and cinemas were ordered to have such signs on display by the Nazi’s as a large percentage of the German population were not actually anti Jewish but were to scared to disobey the Nazi’s. Source D also describes random attacks of terror on Jews in the countryside before Krystallnacht even took place. This suggests that there was hostility against the Jews in the public eye. I believe that this source shows that the Krystallnacht attacks were probably a mixture of spontaneous and organised attacks, by the public and by the Nazi’s. Source E however places the blame almost entirely on the organised attacks of the Nazi’s. It was written in yet another anonymous letter sent to the British Consul. I states that nearly all of the attacks were by SA men and Nazi soldiers, with the German public having next to nothing to do with it. It also states that the German officials supplied the SA men with weapons and a list of names and addresses of Jews. Source E completely correlates with source C, but if you read between the lines on source D it may not appear that they agree entirely.

Sources F and G have the same view on the events of Krystallnacht, but their messages are not necessarily the same. They both condemn the acts of Krystallnacht but they do it in different ways. Source F is a picture of Hitler, or another Nazi, looking up to the spirit of Tsar Nicolas II of Russia. Tsar Nicolas ordered attacks against Jews during his reign (1894 – 1917) and he and his family were killed by communists who disagreed with the anti Semitic views. Tsar Nicolas is saying to the Nazi “attacking the Jews never did me any good my fascist friend”. Basically the message of the cartoon is saying that the attacks on the Jews do not get the Nazis anywhere and will only end up in their eventual downfall. It was written in a Russian magazine after Krystallnacht, and has the general feeling that history is repeating itself. Source G gives the message that it was the Nazis who organised the attacks on the Jews, but the German public was helpless to stop it. It is basically saying stand up for the Jews and you will end up like them. If anyone stood up for the Jews or displayed anti Nazi views, they were tortured, beaten or even killed by the German officials. No one was allowed to think for themselves once the Nazis came into power, and they no way of escaping. Both cartoons have different messages, source F is almost a warning to the Nazis, reminding them what happened and warning it could happen to them. Source G displays the complete control that the Nazis have, and what they are doing to all of the Jews. Both cartoons are anti Nazi but in different ways.

Source I, on face value, seams to verify source H outright. On further investigation, and use of outside knowledge, it becomes obvious that Hitler did not say what was portrayed, or at least did not mean it. Even from sources A & B, you can see that Hitler was in no way opposed to the events of Krystallnacht, but entirely for it. Frau Troost was probably briebed by Hitler and the Nazi’s, or was very loyal considering her husband was one of Hitler’s favourite architects. However, Goering was horrified over Krystallnacht, not because of the deaths, but because of the potential economic consequences. The insurance costs would surely damage the German economy, so Goering seized all of the insurance money that was being paid out for damage inflicted on Jewish property, and the Jews had to pay out 1000 million marks compensation for the death of Ernst Von Rath – the reason Krystallnacht took place. In source H, it states that Hitler agreed that events such as Krystallnacht should not take place. This is probably true as Hitler was a smart man and would have realised the consequences on the economy if further events like this took place, but in no way would he have tried to stop Krystallnacht on the night, or if it had been premeditated.

Source A quite clearly states that Gobbels had arranged an attack by the SA on synagogues and shops, and that Hitler welcomed this ‘project’ with open arms. This quite clearly that not every single event of Krystallnacht was spontaneous, and this information was taken from a first hand account by a Nazi reporter, which usually would be deemed unreliable, but seams to be factual on this account. Source B refutes this by explaining that Gobbels suggested that any demonstrations should not be organised or started by the Nazi party, but neither should they be discouraged. Also, I know for other outside sources that police were either involved in the attacks or did nothing, and fire engines would only put out fires in German owned buildings, unless a fire in a Jewish building was a threat to a German one. These actions were taken on orders from the Nazi government, and show that although the attacks were not directly organised by the Nazi’s, they were encouraged and aided by people in power. Source C, an independent report by an American journalist shows that the Nazi’s wanted everyone to believe that the events of Krystallnacht were spontaneous and unaided, but had reliable inside information that Nazi stormtroopers and SS men in civilian clothing were starting the attacks and encouraging other people to join in. Source D shows that even though the attacks may not have been premeditated (this is not refuted or verified by the source) there was still great unrest and hatred towards the Jews before the attacks even started. It talks about signs all over the country in sop windows and so forth reading ‘Jews not wanted’. These may have actually been put there by the nazi’s and kept there under forced pretences, because it is a fact that most of the German civilian population were not actually anti Jew, but if they expressed sympathy for the Jews the Nazi’s would severely punish them. This information could also go to prove that the events of Krystallnacht were not spontaneous, the Nazi’s did cause most of the damage and that the civilians who joined in could have been forced to. Source E is not recognisable as a valuable report, as the source of it is unknown, but it’s clearly very anti Nazi, which would explain the wish for anonymity as the Nazi’s tortured or killed anyone who expressed views against them. It states that police gave SA men with axes, housebreaking tools and ladders and that a list of the names and addresses of the Jewish shops and houses was distributed by the Nazi government. This quite clearly shows premeditated aided attacks by the Nazi government and refutes the idea that the events were spontaneous and unaided by the government. Source F and G both completely refute the idea that the attacks were spontaneous, and both put all of the blame on the Nazis. Source G even states that the Germans were not only innocent, but also helpless to stop it. Source H indirectly suggests that Gobbels was responsible for the attacks, but that it was not the whole of the Nazi regime that was involved. It is believed that Gobbels started the attacks to help with the power struggle he was having in the Nazi ranks. It does not say if it was Nazis who carried out the attacks or if it was German civilians, but it does suggest they were premeditated. Source I doesn’t seam very reliable to me, because even if Hitler did not organise any such attacks on the Jewish population, he would not have condemned them, due to his extremely anti Semitic views developed in his childhood. Even after putting all of the sources together, it is impossible to determine for definite if the attacks were spontaneous or not, and if they were carried out by the Nazis or if it was executed by the German public. After all of the information is taken into consideration, I believe that the initial attacks were organised, but some of the German public joined in voluntarily. The Nazis definitely premeditated some of the attacks, but probably not to the extent of that which happened.

Krystallnacht - source related study

This is a preview of the whole essay

Document Details

Related Essays

Nazi Germany - source related study.

Kristallnacht - source related study

Kristallnacht - source related study.

Kristallnacht - source related study.